Relationship between Prosocial Behavior and Social Welfare in Singapore

Abstract

In this paper, we study the empirical relationship of characteristics of social networks

with prosocial behaviors in formal and informal contexts in Singapore. With this paper, we expand our knowledge about the determinants of prosocial behavior, and we contribute to the debate on social capital by answering the question: what is it about networks that promotes prosocial behavior? We first introduce some general insights from research on social networks. Then we link these insights to prosocial behavior.

Relationship between Prosocial Behavior and Social Welfare in Singapore

Singapore' success in economic and social development in recent decades has been due to pragmatic policies and general public acceptance of a limited government role in such areas as health, social security. Pragmatism has consisted of placing a significant part of the burden of social welfare on families and individuals rather than on the state while, at the same time, using government policies to ensure that citizens do take social welfare objectives seriously(Chia, 2008).

Social contexts strongly affect the contributions that people make to the welfare of others and to society in Singapore. Whether people are asked to engage in prosocial behavior and the odds that they will comply with such a request all depend on the relations of an individual with his fellow citizens - the social network. In the debate on social capital, social networks are also assumed to be crucial for civic engagement. However, the state of knowledge about the empirical effects of social networks lags behind the theoretically alleged benefits of social networks for prosocial behavior(Mendes, 2009).

One observation from Singapore's recent annual government budget is that, besides using fiscal measures to strengthen existing pillars of growth and to identify new engines of growth, increasingly new initiatives are also implemented to redistribute incomes to older, lower wage workers, to make economic progress more inclusive. There is a shift towards a more embracing attitude towards using cash transfer to the less privileged in the society. Social protection is a necessary function of the government. Social protection ensures adequate standard of living during times of unemployment, disability and retirement. The target groups for social protection include low-wage workers, low income families, unemployed workers and needy elderly. With the feminization of aging, social protection also covers needy female elderly as well (Asher, 2008). Networks provide many useful things to people, like information, contacts, and encouragement. These resources obtained from networks are often called social capital . We introduce a distinction between three types of social capital, corresponding to the reasons why networks may provide resources to individuals. First, individuals may have access to more resources because they have large and diverse networks. We label this type of social capital scope-based social capital because it emerges simply from knowing a large number of people from a wide range of different backgrounds. The larger the scope of the network, the larger the stock of resources that individuals may access( Chia, 2009). Second, individuals may have access to more resources ...